This I can surely agree with. I understand why programmers wrote them this way, but it's unnecessary. Shannon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Toews" <DogRiver@xxxxxxxx> To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 8:42 AM Subject: [bookport] Re: braille translation mistakes > My preference would be for synthesizers to get out of the > abbreviation-expansion business altogether. Some on this list may dispute > my claim, but I think I'm more able to intelligently interpret these > things than a computer is. > > Bruce > > -- > Bruce Toews > E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: DogRiver@xxxxxxxx > Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): http://www.ogts.net > Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com > > On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Shannon A. Reece wrote: > > > Absolutely Sarah. I can understand Crystal's irritation with hearing DR > > referred to as drive when it's obvious that DR. in the case of her book was > > doctor. But with any abbreviation there is more than one meaning and even a > > sighted person reading DR translates it to the appropriate meaning in her > > mind. Hearing a wrong translation by the tripple talk for abbreviations > > doesn't bother me at all because I do what any sighted person would do and > > translate them right even if the synthesizer speaks them wrong, but > > beside(s), and for the have only one meaning and should be fixed if > > possible. > > Shannon > > From: "Sarah Cranston" <cranston.sarah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: [bookport] Re: braille translation mistakes > > > > > > The problem with DR is that sometimes it's Doctor, and sometimes it's Drive. > > That's the main problem with Braille back-translation. That is why beside, > > besides, and "for the" will be easy to fix, they don't pull double duty. > > > > > > > > Yes, and don't forget to add Dr. to the list. I just finished reading a > > book where the main character was a Dr., and, of course, was constantly read > > as Drive. > > Crystal > > > > > > > > >